| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? 12:59 - May 25 with 18804 views | itfcjoe |
I hear all this talk about Mick not giving youngsters a chance, and it seems too many posters aren't looking at the league as a whole. So I have tried to....
All stats are minutes on the pitch in the league only, and all ages are at today's date
U20 players
Barnsley - 6,750 minutes (5,063 by loanees)
Nottingham Forest - 5,185 minutes
Bristol City - 3,844 minutes (3,425 by loanees)
Birmingham - 3,680 minutes (1,007 by loanees)
Huddersfield - 3,513 minutes (2,310 by loanees)
Ipswich - 3,399 minutes
So only 5 clubs have players U20 getting more game time than at Portman Road, and only 1 club (Forest) has more game time given to U20 players that aren't on loan at the club.
Players aged 21-22
Preston North End - 8,412 minutes (682 by loanees)
Forest - 8,129 minutes (1,649 by loanees)
Reading - 6,811 minutes
Leeds - 5,854 minutes (1,284 by loanees)
Ipswich - 5,465 minutes (295 by loanees)
So only 4 teams have given more minutes to 21 and 22 year olds, and if you take loan players out of it we move to 4th
Overall - all players U22
Forest - 13,314 minutes (1,649 by loanees)
Barnsley - 10,573 minutes (7,201 by loanees)
Ipswich - 8,864 minutes (295 by loanees)
So overall only 2 clubs are given youngsters more game time than us, and 1 of them is mostly using loanees.
The reality is that Notingham Forest are the only side who are getting more minutes out of young players than we are at all ages, when you take out loan players - other than them we are right up there in every category.
For the purpose of this exercise our young players are Dozzell, Emmanuel, Kenlock, Bishop (U20) and Grant, Digby, Webster and Ward (U22) - so a mixture of academy products and signings, but most importantly nearly all of them are tied down for at tleast the next couple of years.
Mick has many faults, but the stats show it is unfair to accuse him of not giving youngsters game time.
 [Post edited 25 May 2017 13:02]
|  |
| |  |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:56 - May 25 with 5278 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:53 - May 25 by Sarge |
On the point of the style of football, 2 years ago it worked, now it doesn't and rather than try something else we keep flogging the dead horse. |
Agree to a point (not the point that was being discussed though), but I would suggest it's the quality of players that's the biggest problem, rather than the style itself per se |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:57 - May 25 with 5281 views | gordon |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:41 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
There were only 2 teenagers who played more minutes than Dozzell this year in the league - Sessegnon at Fulham and Brereton at Forest. |
Ronaldo Viera at Leeds and Tammy Abraham at Bristol City surely would've done wouldn't they? |  | | |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 14:02 - May 25 with 5271 views | TheBlueBarca |
The bigger issue for me is the players we are producing at the moment and how few of them are really ready for the top half of this league in terms of standard when they break through, which means at a club level we are not producing the players. As the stats prove it's not as if they aren't getting enough game time.
Look at the home grown players we have here that get regular breaks in the 1st team at the moment ... Kenlock, Emanuel, Smith, Hyam, Dozzell and Bishop. They wouldn't make any of the sides in the top 10 of this league this season.
That's the real problem with our youth system. |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 14:06 - May 25 with 5262 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:57 - May 25 by gordon |
Ronaldo Viera at Leeds and Tammy Abraham at Bristol City surely would've done wouldn't they? |
Buggar - that was from a conversation I had last night regarding U18s forgetting I had expanded to U20s - you are of course correct.
But for all talk of Dozzell being underplayed, there is only 2 players in age group playing more than him | |
| |
| on 14:37 - May 25 with 5233 views | _ |
|  | | |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 17:27 - May 25 with 5186 views | BtreeBlueBlood |
Will Forest play these youngsters with their new owner?? |  | | |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 17:58 - May 25 with 5172 views | Edmunds5 |
Fair enough, but it all snowballs, its partly down to lack of investment and depth in the squad that some of the younger players have been given a go. If Mick had a choice I don't think he'd play them, but we've invested so badly on older players in recent years that I think he's just thought, why not give them a go, they cant be no worse?
Do I actually think MM has a firm belief in those young players or made it an objective to play them? Not really, Emmanuel has played here and there but never truly been preferred to a player who isn't even a right back. Bishop hasn't really progressed, Digby hasn't played consistently enough to make a mark, Dozzell has barely played a full game and Grant got sent back. |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:06 - May 25 with 5158 views | Vic |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:41 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
There were only 2 teenagers who played more minutes than Dozzell this year in the league - Sessegnon at Fulham and Brereton at Forest. |
That's an impressive stat - I had no idea. All your stats here lay to rest a lot of the frequent rubbish aimed at Mick. He has his faults, but this clearly isn't one of them.
You've done us all a big favour with this thread. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:13 - May 25 with 5151 views | yesjohn99 |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 13:31 - May 25 by textbackup |
I've never once said that, I'd happily finish lower if we had the kids in and played with some attacking purpose. But what we see consistently is 'we stop them first' |
We finish lower and there is a good chance we go down. Youngsters of not that's a disaster for the club. | | | |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:16 - May 25 with 5141 views | Mullet |
Of all the criticisms this season that has always been the weirdest one by far. Let alone what being so reliant on youngsters actually produced on the pitch.
While I wouldn't blame the kids, it's no coincidence it's resulted in such a poor return when they've been the second or even the last preferred option at times and been a signal of such upheaval.
Your numbers are no surprise at all, they just confirm the obvious. Especially when you look at the relative fortunes of those with even bigger totals. |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:37 - May 25 with 5127 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 17:58 - May 25 by Edmunds5 |
Fair enough, but it all snowballs, its partly down to lack of investment and depth in the squad that some of the younger players have been given a go. If Mick had a choice I don't think he'd play them, but we've invested so badly on older players in recent years that I think he's just thought, why not give them a go, they cant be no worse?
Do I actually think MM has a firm belief in those young players or made it an objective to play them? Not really, Emmanuel has played here and there but never truly been preferred to a player who isn't even a right back. Bishop hasn't really progressed, Digby hasn't played consistently enough to make a mark, Dozzell has barely played a full game and Grant got sent back. |
This is the whole point - Mick can't really do right for being right.
In your last paragraph - why no mention for Ward, Wenster and Kenlock? Whu not look at Bishop's original progress rather than his recent backward steps.....or the fact Dozzell has just turned 18 | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:25 - May 25 with 5099 views | DinnernotTea |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:37 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
This is the whole point - Mick can't really do right for being right.
In your last paragraph - why no mention for Ward, Wenster and Kenlock? Whu not look at Bishop's original progress rather than his recent backward steps.....or the fact Dozzell has just turned 18 |
You watch a lot of youth football. By all accounts each age group plays the ball on the floor and technically look really good. On the flipside to your argument if we had a different style of first team football we would see even more come through and cement a place?
Being taught to look after the ball between the ages of 8-18 to then be taught to smash it into the channels and force errors with the seniors won't help anyone surely? | |
| Beware of The Ipswich Cabbages
|
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:43 - May 25 with 5091 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:25 - May 25 by DinnernotTea |
You watch a lot of youth football. By all accounts each age group plays the ball on the floor and technically look really good. On the flipside to your argument if we had a different style of first team football we would see even more come through and cement a place?
Being taught to look after the ball between the ages of 8-18 to then be taught to smash it into the channels and force errors with the seniors won't help anyone surely? |
There isn't an academy team in the land that doesn't play pretty passing football, but ultimately academies are there to produce footballers for the first team - the tail can't wag the dog.
Look at someone like Bishop that broke through, when he did he was excellent technically but could also look after himself and that's the key. The Championship, like the Premier League, is hugely physically demanding and you can't just make it as a ball-player.
Good technical neat and tidy footballers are 10 a penny in academies, but those skills will hold you up - it's being good on the ball under pressure that makes the difference and Mick doesn't stop players playing - when Dozzell, Ward, Kenlock, Webster have all played they are allowed to hold the ball and use it well | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:48 - May 25 with 5086 views | Edmunds5 |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 19:37 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
This is the whole point - Mick can't really do right for being right.
In your last paragraph - why no mention for Ward, Wenster and Kenlock? Whu not look at Bishop's original progress rather than his recent backward steps.....or the fact Dozzell has just turned 18 |
I agree that he's given youth a chance, and yeah he has benefited the players you've mentioned. I'm just saying there are certain managers who give youth players a chance because its part of their way of managing.
I think with Mick its more a case of having to play those players cause he basically doesn't have better experienced ones.
I'm not trying to patronise the younger players, I just think Mick hasn't had much choice cause we "invested" badly to start with. I don't think it was a strategy to play younger players. Who else do you play, Douglas? He did, more than Dozzell.
I could also argue that Dozzell would have featured more under a more forward thinking manager. [Post edited 25 May 2017 20:51]
| |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:55 - May 25 with 5068 views | DinnernotTea |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:43 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
There isn't an academy team in the land that doesn't play pretty passing football, but ultimately academies are there to produce footballers for the first team - the tail can't wag the dog.
Look at someone like Bishop that broke through, when he did he was excellent technically but could also look after himself and that's the key. The Championship, like the Premier League, is hugely physically demanding and you can't just make it as a ball-player.
Good technical neat and tidy footballers are 10 a penny in academies, but those skills will hold you up - it's being good on the ball under pressure that makes the difference and Mick doesn't stop players playing - when Dozzell, Ward, Kenlock, Webster have all played they are allowed to hold the ball and use it well |
We don't and haven't used the ball well for some time so for the likes of Dozzell and Bishop it will always be that much harder. This is my point, Plan A is to get up top quick, either in the channels or to a Murphy type, force errors and score. When that fails there is no Plan B. Going from boy to man football is hard enough but even harder with his obsession to Plan A football. | |
| Beware of The Ipswich Cabbages
|
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:00 - May 25 with 5064 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 20:48 - May 25 by Edmunds5 |
I agree that he's given youth a chance, and yeah he has benefited the players you've mentioned. I'm just saying there are certain managers who give youth players a chance because its part of their way of managing.
I think with Mick its more a case of having to play those players cause he basically doesn't have better experienced ones.
I'm not trying to patronise the younger players, I just think Mick hasn't had much choice cause we "invested" badly to start with. I don't think it was a strategy to play younger players. Who else do you play, Douglas? He did, more than Dozzell.
I could also argue that Dozzell would have featured more under a more forward thinking manager. [Post edited 25 May 2017 20:51]
|
Ultimately though, we are giving youngsters opportunities at a better rate than the rest of division whatever the reason - I understand when some people say he maybe isn't that good with the youngsters - but some people are so OTT about it, look at Benyu stories - why stay here when manager doesn't give chances etc etc.
Mick went into the squad knowing that Kenlock, Emmanuel, were going to need to be first reserves and left them as that; that Ward and Webster would be regulars; I'm sure he'd have hoped to have got more out of Bishop; and ultimately Dozzell has struggled in most games hes played - but 17 year olds just don't play in this league | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:49 - May 25 with 5048 views | thatdamgood89 |
Having worked in senior roles dealing with spreadsheets and stats etc I know you can make stat sheets and stats really tell you what you want to hear. The fact you have a Bias agenda towards 'wanting the good in mick to be seen' shall be parked for a period
I'd like to know
How's many of these minutes are from
Starting the game
Coming on as a sub in a game we were winning by Only 1 goal
Coming on a Sub when losing by more then one goal
Oh and Take out the Rotherham game where the game may as well been played on rhe beCh |  |
| Hey :) Please check out my Ipswich Town F.C podcast 'Talk Of The Town'
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPhPy_79sSvPSugh32vN8qg?view_as=subscriber
Available every Wednesday on;
YouTube
Spotify
Buzzsrpout
Google Podcasts
Itune Podcasts |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:52 - May 25 with 5046 views | braveblue |
Ward and Kenlock have 51 appearances between them. How many of the minutes apply to them? If you then take the rest of the youngsters how does that look? Interesting I would think. | | | |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:56 - May 25 with 5033 views | Herbivore |
Got to admire the thick-skulled idiocy of someone who'd down arrow a factual post that's taken some time and effort to construct purely because it doesn't fit with their agenda. Incredible really. |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:58 - May 25 with 5033 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:49 - May 25 by thatdamgood89 |
Having worked in senior roles dealing with spreadsheets and stats etc I know you can make stat sheets and stats really tell you what you want to hear. The fact you have a Bias agenda towards 'wanting the good in mick to be seen' shall be parked for a period
I'd like to know
How's many of these minutes are from
Starting the game
Coming on as a sub in a game we were winning by Only 1 goal
Coming on a Sub when losing by more then one goal
Oh and Take out the Rotherham game where the game may as well been played on rhe beCh |
This is pathetic - these stats are presented honestly across all teams. If you want more info find it yourself - but can you discount all other teams dead rubbers as well and any random thing you can think of to try and make it look bad. | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:59 - May 25 with 5032 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:52 - May 25 by braveblue |
Ward and Kenlock have 51 appearances between them. How many of the minutes apply to them? If you then take the rest of the youngsters how does that look? Interesting I would think. |
Why would I take them out? Should I take out Ben Osborn from Forest or Callum Robinson at Preston - maybe Sessegnon from Fulham too..... | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 22:02 - May 25 with 5020 views | Herbivore |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:49 - May 25 by thatdamgood89 |
Having worked in senior roles dealing with spreadsheets and stats etc I know you can make stat sheets and stats really tell you what you want to hear. The fact you have a Bias agenda towards 'wanting the good in mick to be seen' shall be parked for a period
I'd like to know
How's many of these minutes are from
Starting the game
Coming on as a sub in a game we were winning by Only 1 goal
Coming on a Sub when losing by more then one goal
Oh and Take out the Rotherham game where the game may as well been played on rhe beCh |
Joe has consistently said Mick should go. | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 11:36 - May 26 with 4969 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 21:58 - May 25 by itfcjoe |
This is pathetic - these stats are presented honestly across all teams. If you want more info find it yourself - but can you discount all other teams dead rubbers as well and any random thing you can think of to try and make it look bad. |
Even though your reply has gone I think your post is pathetic because it is an attempt to skew things in a hugely biased manner which is neither achievable (What other teams had games when they were on the beach that should be discarded?) or presentable as the criteria is so strange and pointless.
Most of the Social media sharing is by Forest fans - the post has just upset you because it doesn't make Mick look bad which you can't have | |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 12:04 - May 26 with 4963 views | DoobDude |
Good statistics and well done for doing this.
However like most statistics it doesn't give the full picture.
It fails to show that none of Dozzell, Emmanuel, Kenlock, Bishop were first choice regulars this season. If Knudsen had been fit he would have played every game and Spence was brought in rather than play Emmanuel, when we went to a back 5.
Dozzell was played at bizarre times and never "given a run" in the team.
Of the other 4 only Webster and Ward were regulars (but both were dropped after mistakes in games).
He is far more likely to sub a young player after a poor half than an experienced pro (thinking Chambers, Skuse, Douglas).
So my view hasn't changed about McCarthy giving youth a chance.
What I didn't realise is how many managers in this league also don't give youth a chance. This is not particularly good for the future prospects of British teams. |  |
| |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 12:27 - May 26 with 4953 views | itfcjoe |
| Is Mick giving youngsters enough game time? on 12:04 - May 26 by DoobDude |
Good statistics and well done for doing this.
However like most statistics it doesn't give the full picture.
It fails to show that none of Dozzell, Emmanuel, Kenlock, Bishop were first choice regulars this season. If Knudsen had been fit he would have played every game and Spence was brought in rather than play Emmanuel, when we went to a back 5.
Dozzell was played at bizarre times and never "given a run" in the team.
Of the other 4 only Webster and Ward were regulars (but both were dropped after mistakes in games).
He is far more likely to sub a young player after a poor half than an experienced pro (thinking Chambers, Skuse, Douglas).
So my view hasn't changed about McCarthy giving youth a chance.
What I didn't realise is how many managers in this league also don't give youth a chance. This is not particularly good for the future prospects of British teams. |
This is the whole point though - people knock Mick and say he is terrible with kids and doesn't trust them etc but he should be being compared against his peers rather than standards some fans seem to have on developing youngsters.
Maybe the Championship isn't the right place for kids, and integrating them is as difficult as Mick says - Brentford's decision to shut their academy seems understandable if they are to reinvest a further £2m into the 1st team squad | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
